Wars Designated for 1v1

Discussion in 'Wars' started by OcToPuS, Feb 4, 2014.

  1. PvP is at a all time low, and I think I have an interesting solution.
    I think there should be designated 1v1 wars, off of BL. You would not have to be in a clan, there would be a set time, and the players would start the war immediately.

    How would this give incentive to PvP?
    It would give incentive by the rewards given out.
    Examples/Suggestions: Aqua, Inferno, Mithril, Equipment, and Achievements. There would also be a players War History, on their profile similar to Clan War History.

    How wouldn't this be abused?

    There would be strict size requirements, so you couldn't use a very small account, and the closer your opponent is to your size, the better and more rewards you would get.


    Please Post Constructive Criticism, and Support Below.
     
  2. Reserved
     
  3. No support, people would bank on either inactives/alts an would be abused/exploited. Sorry
     
  4. True, but PvP is in dire need of fixing, and this, in my opinion is one of the better ideas.
     
  5. To stop people from farming inactives make it so the person has to accept that challenge.
     
  6. How would you determine the winner? Would someone win by hitting the other person a couple of times then self pinning on EB or quests? It would be hard to come up with a system for determining who won over a short interval that couldn't be exploited to make the war strategyless and not fun for anyone.
     
  7. But what if the other person didn't want to fight. Best way to fix this is that person has to be online to be forced to war.
     
  8. No outside hits, no quests, no ebs, no pinning :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
  9. So you're saying they should be forced to war then cannot hit outside of that war.... And no one hit them No Support to many loop holes
     
  10. If you want to pvp just hit someone. :/
     
  11. Maybe like:
    • You cant be dtw while war -> no selfpinning
    • A player can surrender -> gives a set end
    • You can only engage a war against the same person after a cooldown of 2 weeks? -> prevents exploiting with alts

    Hope those BB-Codes work
     
  12. Friends (or alts) would just declare war on each other to avoid being farmed by large OSW clans they tick off. Too easy to hide after doing actions you should face consequences for.
     
  13. And I do, often
    Its the incentive that others seem to lack that im trying to make
     
  14. All great ideas
     
  15. Maybe cool down between all wars, no matter who it's against? And the option to refuse a war challenge, but for a gold cost, which the challanged gets 60% of?
     
  16. Challenger*
     
    • limited to 2 hours of war -> not able to abuse it to hide
    • general cooldown (maybe 22hours, so you can do it every day) -> same as the previous one
    • maybe matching like EE so it can't be exploited with the friend thing? You sign up and get a fair match (shouldnt be exploitable if done right)
     
  17. I don't believe someone should be forced to war or pay though I would like more war but if they're forced it doesn't mean anything to them like a forced apology lmao. But if it was more challenge then accept or decline and time options etc that would be better :D
     
  18. sounds good
     
  19. :D That basically sounds perfect